Recovery after intensive care dataset

This excel dataset guided part of the interview discussion in a qualitative study about recovery after discharge from ICU. The study explored patients views about their recovery at six and twelve months and factors that facilitated recovery, and determined additional services that patients felt were missing during their recovery

Survey questionnaire for critical care researchers and clinicians

Critical care researchers and clinicians were surveyed on issues concerning healthcare research in general. The overall objective of this survey was to obtain the views of clinicians and researchers about the importance of early phase trials, the use of surrogate outcomes and outcome standardisation. Another objective was to prioritise the outcomes identified in the systematic review, based on its relevance in clinical decision making, research and overall importance. The questions to the clinicians and researchers were specific to critical care studies. Dataset is embargoed until 31 July 2025

Search strategy dataset

The search strategy was used to select randomised control trial articles from three databases, MEDLINE (Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online, or MEDLARS Online) is a bibliographic database of life sciences and biomedical information, EMBASE (Excerpta Medica dataBASE) and CINAHL (Cumulated Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature) from six critical care journals, American journal of respiratory & critical care medicine, Lancet respiratory medicine, Chest, Critical care medicine and Intensive care medicine. This dataset is embargoed until 31 July 2025.

Correspondence inviting interested participants to partake in research

The UK Clinical Research Collaboration (UKCRC) collaboration brings together UK research funding bodies, universities, National Health Service (NHS), regulatory authorities, pharmaceutical industries, and patients. This dataset is correspondence (an email) which included the survey link (Email to UKCRC Network) was circulated to the Statisticians and Health Economists within the network by the Programme Director. The participants were able to access the survey to provide their responses anonymously. Allstat is a UK-based worldwide email broadcast system for the statistical community. An email inviting the interested participants (Initial Email to ALLSTAT) was circulated on the mailing list. Interested participants were requested to get in touch via email. The participants who had shown interest in the initial invite were emailed information on the survey which included the survey link (Email to ALLSTAT with Survey Information and Survey Link)

Dataset for "Reluctant heroes: new doctors negotiating their identities dialogically on social media"

Files contain codes for RPs and transcripts. This is the underpinning data for the article. Please note the files are available as xlsx and pdf file formats. Abstract for the paper: Background: Ensuring that students transition smoothly into the identity of a doctor is a perpetual challenge for medical curricula. Developing professional identity, according to cultural-historical activity theory, requires negotiation of dialectic tensions between individual agency and the structuring influence of institutions. We posed the research question: How do medical interns, other clinicians and institutions dialogically construct their interacting identities? Methods: Our qualitative methodology was rooted in dialogism, Bakhtin's cultural-historical theory that accounts for how language mediates learning and identity. Reasoning that the COVID pandemic would accentuate and expose pre-existing tensions, we monitored feeds into the Twitter microblogging platform during medical students' accelerated entry to practice; identified relevant posts from graduating students, other clinicians and institutional representatives; and kept an audit trail of chains of dialogue. Sullivan's dialogic methodology and Gee's heuristics guided a reflexive, linguistic analysis. Results: There was a gradient of power and affect. Institutional representatives used metaphors of heroism to celebrate ‘their graduates’, implicitly according a heroic identity to themselves as well. Interns, meanwhile, identified themselves as incapable, vulnerable and fearful because the institutions from which they had graduated had not taught them to practise. Senior doctors' posts were ambivalent: Some identified with institutions, maintaining hierarchical distance between them-selves and interns; others, along with residents, acknowledged interns' distress, expressing empathy, support and encouragement, which constructed an identity of collegial solidarity. Conclusions: The dialogue exposed hierarchical distance between institutions and the graduates they educated, which constructed mutually contradictory identities. Powerful institutions strengthened their identities by projecting positive affects onto interns who, by contrast, had fragile identities and sometimes strongly negative affects. We speculate that this polarisation may be contributing to the poor morale of doctors in training and propose that, to maintain the vitality of medical education, institutions should seek to reconcile their projected identities with the lived identities of graduates. Published article: https://doi.org/10.1111/medu.1510

Systematic review dataset

Randomised controlled trials published in six journals in the critical care category with the highest impact factor at the time was included in the sytematic review. All interventions, pharmacological, non-pharmacological and medical device were included in this review, based on the assumption that the studies aimed to improve the clinical and efficacy outcomes of the patients and these outcomes were similar across several types of interventions. There are three sheets in the excel sheet. The first sheet is the selected articles for the systematic review. The second sheet is the outcome extracted and the third sheet is the outcome extraction form. Note this dataset is available as xlsx (with 4 tabs),. The dataset is also available in cvs format (with each tab of the xlsx saved as separate file). The dataset is embargoed until 31 July 20

Research Data from the Petechiae in Children study

Data pertaining to the validation of clinical practice guidelines for the management of fever and non-blanching rashes in children. Data from this record is embargoed until 29/07/202

Survey questionnaire for statisticians and methodologists

Statisticians and health economists were surveyed on issues concerning healthcare research in general. The objective of the survey was to gather the views on the relevance of Phase II studies and to gather views on the use of surrogate outcome measures in health care research. Statisticians and health economists were contacted through UK Clinical Research Collaboration (UKCRC) network and Allstat mailing list. The dataset is embargoed until 31 July 2025

How do children and adolescents experience healthcare professionals? Scoping review and interpretive synthesis. Dataset from Dryad

Objective: Explore children’s and adolescents’ (CADs’) lived experiences of healthcare professionals (HCPs). Eligibility criteria: Research articles containing direct first-person quotations by CADs (aged 0-18 years inclusive) describing how they experienced HCPs. Scoping review methodology provided a six-step framework to, first, identify and organise existing evidence. Interpretive phenomenology provided methodological principles for, second, an interpretive synthesis of the life-worlds of CADs receiving healthcare, as represented by verbatim accounts of their experiences. Five key databases (Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, CINAHL Plus, and Web of Science), from inception through to January 2019, reference lists, and opportunistically identified publications. Tabulation of study characteristics, contextual information, and verbatim extraction of all ‘relevant’ (as defined above) direct quotations. Analysis of basic scope of the evidence-base. The research team worked reflexively and collaboratively to interpret the qualitative data and construct a synthesis of children’s experiences. To consolidate and elaborate the interpretation, we held two focus groups with CAD inpatients in a children’s hospital. 669 quotations from 99 studies described CADs’ experiences of HCPs. Favourable experiences were of forming trusting relationships and being involved in healthcare discussions and decisions; less favourable experiences were of not relating to or being unable to trust HCPs and/or being excluded from conversations about them. HCPs fostered trusting relationships by being personable, wise, sincere, and relatable. HCPs made CADs feel involved by including them in conversations, explaining medical information, and listening to CADs’ wider needs and preferences.These findings strengthen the case for making CADs partners in healthcare despite their youth. We propose that a criterion for high-quality child-centred healthcare should be that HCPs communicate in ways that engender trust and involvement. Methods: Authors searched five key databases (Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, CINAHL Plus, and Web of Science), from inception through to 11th January 2019, reference lists, and opportunistically identified publications. Articles presenting first-person direct quotations from children and adolescents aged up to 18 years (inclusive) and describing experiences of healthcare professionals were included. All relevant quotations were extracted, along with ages and genders, to provide the dataset. Quotations were analysed using interpretive phenomenology and Braun and Clarke's thematic analysis

Surrogate outcome measures

A surrogate endpoint is a biomarker intended to substitute for a clinical endpoint that should predict clinical benefit or harm or lack of both (definition by National Institute of Health working group). A valid surrogate measure should aid the diagnosis of the disease, be able to predict the clinical endpoint and be able to monitor the response to the intervention. An ideal surrogate outcome measure should mediate all mechanisms of action to the clinical endpoint. Note Figure 1 of this dataset shows an ideal surrogate outcome measure. Figure 2 shows invalid markers. This dataset is embargoed until 31 July 2025